Re: sanity check in init.d
>> "S" == Shaleh <shaleh@livenet.net> writes:
S> Part of the problem is that the output may
S> a) be loss if there is a lot of it
S> b) confuse people because the boot process is already noisy
But does this make the info less necessary/useful ?
S> c) it is not stored anywhere so if you do not see or write down the
S> message it is gone anyway.
It desnÄt show in dmesg or the logs?
S> On my machine I use linux logo. This clears the screen before showing the
S> login prompt.
I also clear my screen (in /etc/issue).
S> So any daemon init messages are lost to me anyway.
They are anyway. If you or another user wants to see them, he
shouldn't use these gimmicks. I still believe this doesn't invalidate
the purpose of such a message.
S> A user should be able to notice that "hey foo is not running" and
S> quickly notice, "hey I do not have foo".
Hmm, when you look at init.d/, you can't really say which files are
just left-overs and which actually do something. Ideally, on remove,
init.d scripts would be moved to init.d/inactive/ (but then their
location would be different from what is listed in
/var/lib/dpkg/info/*conffiles, so this can't be done unfortunately )
S> SImply running /etc/init.d/foo start should also notice that foo
S> fails to run.
If he knows that there should be output of success. And this is
different from the unix concept.
It there is no output, a user will assume that everything was OK (this
is what he is used from other commands). I do not suggest to remove
the "Starting foo..." output.
I just want to add a output for the case that this is just a leftover
conffile.
The init.d scripts should just behave more like other commands.
S> Perhaps init.d scripts could use a VERBOSE option that will print
S> errors if desired or ran w/ /etc/init.d/foo verbose?
Also possible, but I'd prefer the output to appear anyway. See my last
paragraphs for the reason.
init.d/foo with VERBOSE behaves like a unix command and without it, it
doesn't? To me this appears inconsistent and also maybe confusing.
When I run it, it doesn't give me an error message. If I run it with
VERBOSE, then it does. Hmm, no. Think about commands like rm or
cp. Would such thing make sense to them?
Ciao,
Martin
Reply to: